binding | Martini handler for mapping and validating a raw request | Validation library

The second overload is more specialized than the first one during partial ordering of function templates.

According to [temp.deduct.partial]/5 the reference on T &t of the first overload is ignored during template argument deduction performed for partial ordering. The following paragraphs distinguish based on reference/value category only if both parameters are reference types.

Then T of the first overload can always deduce against a type A* invented from the parameter of the second overload, but T* of the second overload can't deduce against a type A invented from the parameter of the first overload.

Therefore the second overload is more specialized and is chosen.

With T (&t)[4] argument deduction in both directions will fail because deduction of T[4] against A* will fail and so will deduction of T* against A[4]. Array-to-pointer decay of the array type is specified for template argument deduction for a function call but not for template argument deduction for partial ordering. See also active CWG issue 402.

So neither template will be more specialized in this case and the partial ordering tiebreaker does not apply.

The array-to-pointer conversion is not relevant. It is not considered any worse than the identity conversion sequence (see [over.ics.rank]/3.2.1 excluding lvalue transformations which array-to-pointer conversions are).

In NumberPicker try adding compositingGroup just before clipped(...) as:

The intent is to disallow redeclaring structured bindings as references. See CWG 2313.

Remove equal sign. On the screenshot you use Kotlin configuration, but Groovy is needed here. See the difference:

I wish someone can prove me wrong, but this is one of the few corner cases where we meet a limitation of current GHC and we can not get away from using Proxy, Tagged or similar "relics" of the past.

Let's consider a simpler example:

The execution engine starts off with a pointer to your loop, and lazily expands it as it needs to find out what IO action to execute next. With your definition of forever, here's what a few iterations of the loop like like in terms of "objects stored in memory":

Heroku switched the default Node from 14 to 16 in Dec 2021 for the Ruby buildpack .

Heroku updated the heroku/ruby buildpack Node version from Node 14 to Node 16 (see https://devcenter.heroku.com/changelog-items/2306) which is not compatible with the version of Node Sass locked in at the Webpack version you're likely using.

To fix it do these two things:

1. Specify the 14.x Node version in package.json.

It compiles, when you'll add jaxb-runtime dependency, as below:

The Compose application is designed to be used in a single-activity architecture with no fragments.

You can still have multiple activities or fragments and use setContent in each of them, but in this case the transfer of data between activities falls on your shoulders. Use this approach if you're adding new Compose screens to an existing application built the old way.

But with Compose, it's much easier to do all the navigation within a single activity using Compose Navigation. Much less code, better performance due to no unnecessary code layers, easy to transfer data, etc.

To work with the view lifecycle, check out compose side-effects:

1. LaunchedEffect can be used to execute an action when the view appears. It also runs on a coroutine context that is bound to the current composable: you can easily run suspend functions, and when the view disappears from view hierarchy - the coroutine will be canceled.
2. DisposableEffect can be used to subscribe to/unsubscribe from callbacks.

When you rotate the screen, all effects will restart no matter which key you passed.